Originally Posted by
Tomaski
IMHO, framing some of the crew’s actions as “pilot error” is not particularly helpful. “Error” implies that the pilots’s actions were inconsistent with the training culture and operational expectations to which they were exposed. We have a sense for what Boeing expected the pilots to do in this situation, but there was obviously a gap between their assumptions and reality. Before we get anywhere near suggesting pilot error, I think the following questions should be asked and answered:
- How often and when was the last time these pilots practiced a Runaway Stabilizer event in the sim? Was this accomplished at low altitude? How much exposure did they have using the manual trim wheel?
- How often and when was the last time these pilots practiced an Airspeed Unreliable event in the sim? Was this done during the takeoff phase and did it include an erroneous stick shaker?
- Were the pilots ever taught to associate a bad AOA input with unreliable airspeed and altitude?
- Did any of the pilots’ training involve multiple malfunctions, startle, or distraction?
- What was the automation policy at the pilots’ airline, and did their training and operational culture encourage or discourage hand-flying?
- Did any of their training or experience prepare them for situations in which there was no obvious written procedure available?
To the degree that the pilots reacted in a manner consistent with how they were trained, I think it is inaccurate to file those actions under the label “pilot error.”
I flew most of the Boeings and I certainly was trained on this, I did repeat it in recurrent training and I was always aware of the problems a runaway trim could cause as well as the QRH procedures. This emergency is one of those outlined as an immediate action and all of those actions are mandatory knowledge items that require action without reference to the QRH. I consider that as a minimum responsibility as a PIC. How in Heck do you say that is not true? How do you pass the buck on this? What else is not the pilot's responsibility under your amazing new deal? If the loaders put an extra couple of thousand Kg in the aft hold does that allow the pilot to sit there and let the airplane run off the runway through the trees to grandma's house free of responsibility? If the engine blows up because the mechanic put the wrong nozzles in does the pilot now have your permission to turn the airplane into a pinwheel?
The first rule in any situation is to Fly the Airplane. These crews did not do that. They abandoned their basic responsibilities. Sure it was not all their fault because they were badly trained. The airlines they worked for failed them, as did Boeing who were aware of the low quality training and experience. We all dropped the ball by not objecting to the lowering of pilot skills, not just in Indonesia but at home too (Atlas? Air France?). But ignoring and excusing an obvious problem with pilot skills will lead to more of the same. The airplanes are almost perfect and the number of accidents caused by mechanical failures is dropping but the pilot error factor has not changed. maybe because we won't try to fix it because it is not polite to do so?
If I was running any airline there would be a minimum standard of knowledge and ability required of all the staff, and especially the pilots. Being able to respond correctly to any emergency listed in the QRH would be mandatory. I cannot believe some of the stuff I read here; no real pilot in the real world would come up with it. I may be a dinosaur but I still fly jets and still train pilots and I would never allow this to happen on my watch. I owe that to the people who buy tickets on the airplanes I am responsible for or that I fly.
Tell me that it is OK to reduce the standards. Professionalism is not a requirement for a pilot, especially an airline pilot. Any pilot can do anything he wants no matter the consequences. A pilot is not paid to keep the operation safe; that is always someone else's job. If that is what you believe, say so.